The coronation procession of Queen Elizabeth, 14 January 1559 (Edited Section)
- Submitting institution
-
Brunel University London
- Unit of assessment
- 27 - English Language and Literature
- Output identifier
- 029-120754-5824
- Type
- C - Chapter in book
- DOI
-
10.1093/actrade/9780199551385.book.1
- Book title
- John Nichols's The Progresses and Public Processions of Queen Elizabeth I: A New Edition of the Early Modern Sources, Vol. I (1533-1571)
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- ISBN
- 9780199551385
- Open access status
- -
- Month of publication
- January
- Year of publication
- 2014
- URL
-
http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/20564
- Supplementary information
-
-
- Request cross-referral to
- -
- Output has been delayed by COVID-19
- No
- COVID-19 affected output statement
- -
- Forensic science
- No
- Criminology
- No
- Interdisciplinary
- No
- Number of additional authors
-
0
- Research group(s)
-
-
- Proposed double-weighted
- No
- Reserve for an output with double weighting
- No
- Additional information
- The chapter was the culmination of 7 year’s work on the original text(s) from 1559. The initial research problem was to identify the most authoritative manuscript as the Editorial Guidelines for the project stated that 'we will return to the most authoritative text(s) [...] (whether Nichols used these particular texts or not) and edit them afresh.' The project assessed the various manuscripts, compared them with the Nichols’ reproduction in his work and then published the most authoritative one ensuring all Latin was adequately transcribed; any errors rectified; checking much historical data for accuracy; and finally writing the extended ‘Biographical note’.
The issue of which was the authoritative text was no small one as captured by the Research Fellow on the project: “There is a serious problem in that Drad is supposed to be a single edition but, as you show, different copies have different readings. There could be two states of Drad, or is it possible that some copies of Drad use unused sheets of Quenes? I believe there are also copies in Westminster Abbey, the Bodleian, Guildhall Library, and the Folger, as well as the second BL copy.” All of these (with the exception of the Folger edition) had to be consulted and assessed.
In terms of Leahy’s contribution, the biographical note captures years of research done on this text (much of it actually preceding the Nichols project). Given the status of this whole project Leahy also had to ensure the final published edition of the text was the authoritative one, and demonstrate through the research that this was the case, as well as ensuring the whole thing was transcribed perfectly.
- Author contribution statement
- -
- Non-English
- No
- English abstract
- -
